← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Centinel

Thread 3713

Thread ID: 3713 | Posts: 15 | Started: 2002-11-27

Wayback Archive

Centinel [OP]

2002-11-27 19:39 | User Profile

From LewRockwell.com, available online at: [url=http://www.lewrockwell.com/peirce/peirce61.html]http://www.lewrockwell.com/peirce/peirce61.html[/url]

There Is a Storm Brewing

By Michael Peirce November 27, 2002

There was a headline on Drudge recently that contained a strong hint of the coming storm: Song Mocking Schroeder Tops German Pop Charts... It’s about the lies and broken promises of the head of state in Germany, Europe’s strongest nation. Herr Schroeder claimed he was going to cut taxes and get control of the kleptocracy – he sounded much like Clinton in fact. Now his erstwhile German supporters are publicly mocking him.

The fabric is coming unraveled in Europe, in the United States, South America, all over the world. Wherever men sought to worship government as their god, their god has been profaned. The problem with idols is that they don’t deliver. It feels good at first, dancing around the altar and swearing fealty to some graven image that promises the lifetime gravy train, and of course, all the illicit sex you can handle. But it always comes unwound.

"The 'eathen in 'es ignorance, bows down to wood and stone…" Yep, and not just 'eathens but folks who ought to know better. The worship of government however, is waning – that is one god that even the lamest are starting to see, cannot deliver. No matter how much you sacrifice to government of your substance and of your blood, it is never enough. Yet government continues to insist that it is the god of this age, and perhaps it is that – but a false god none the less.

It’s not that collectivism/socialism will not stand. No, that suggests that men have become sane. It’s that it cannot stand. It doesn’t work. God is not mocked.

You may repeal the law of gravity but see what happens when you jump off the world trade center – but wait, that isn’t there anymore. There is just an empty hole where it used to be and Americans, like the Germans, have learned what government promises are worth. Revenge would be ours, said the President, and you can take that to the bank. What Senor Bush forget to mention was that it would not be the justified revenge of the American people upon the perpetrators of that act of war, but upon the Iraqis, whose sin was so much worse than that – they annoyed Senor Bush’s daddy… Osama Bin who?

Like the Germans, Americans have plenty of reason to be annoyed with lying lawmakers. There was some mild pleasure in watching those sniveling democrats get slaughtered in the last election. Their addiction to Marxism and its spawn, political correctness, is very dangerous and they would destroy this country in a heartbeat, all the while prattling about their great love for the "people." Unlike their communist brethren in the un-lamented USSR there is no pretense of love for the "verkers." With the democrats you can be sure that the one group for whom they have no love at all is the working class.

So, the "right wing" won? Not hardly. While lying brazenly about new tax cuts, that particular group of scoundrels continue to neglect their duty to defend our borders while destroying our currency by spending more money than we have. If you doubt my words ask yourself a very important question, "Where is the forty to sixty billion dollars for Homeland Security coming from?" Since they haven’t got it lying around somewhere, and since they haven’t raised a tax or a bond, it can only follow that they are simply printing that money. So long savings, so long future, just line up and chant like the mercenaries do, "Vive la mort, vive la guerre, vive la mercenaire."

Why? Because we are ruled by mercenaries, men without a country. National sovereignty is nothing to them, nor is patriotism. History for them does not exist. Grudge wars and the war on some drugs, the constant power plays and lust for ever more control – these are not the actions of patriots.

It will get worse before it gets better so get ready for the long haul. They have hoodwinked much of the electorate by beating the war drums. "Let’s go kick some ass," has a certain charm to the mouth-breathing public, and who cares if we are treated as serfs… Or whose ass gets kicked. That however, is a tune that has been played maybe a time or two more often than it should – even "Born To Be Wild" gets old after a while.

There is another force brewing out there and if I know about it you may assume they do as well. They, the self-proclaimed forces of truth, justice and the American Way – usurpers of the Republic and murderers of Waco, who seek to rule for the sheer sake of ruling.

Congress (according to Free Republic last week) authorized a poll after the horror of the beltway sniper atrocities, to see if the time was ripe for yet another round of unconstitutional serf control laws (gun control they call it.) To their dismay, the results were that out of 11,000 polled in the vicinity of the sniper attacks, a whopping 88% rejected more gun control out of hand. People have seen in the person of that appalling Chief Moose character, that they had better be armed, because the doctrinaire ideologues of the secularist state will ignore a barrel full of facts to get to a lie, and actually let people die, rather than deviate from the collectivist mantra.

You want to be defended; you better talk to Mr. Glock because Mr. Moose and those like him are dedicated only to defending the failed collectivist doctrine of the sixties. Moose and company are desperately clinging to power but mean ole Mister Reality is in town and that means trouble.

Last week a senior judge in Alabama calmly rejected the ruling of a crazed federal court that required of him that he remove the tablets of God’s own Ten Commandments from outside the State Supreme Court. That this is an outrage is not debatable among civilized American patriots. What is remarkable is that Judge Moore called their bluff, showing that finally, an American has had enough of this despicable and ongoing attack upon our heritage and our religion.

What has the government worried, and well it should be, is this: Judge Moore could simply say, "I need one hundred thousand armed Americans to protect my court house." He’d have them by Wednesday.

Should the governor of a state on our Southern border call for those same volunteers they would be there quite as precipitously. Indeed – some have already answered their own call and are acting in our defense on that very border. Government is outraged – after all, it’s their job to protect the border and those folks "are in the way."

Meantime Jorge Bush is resurrecting his despicable plan to reward illegal immigrants with "amnesty," making him the biggest scofflaw since Abraham Lincoln turned the Republic into just another coercive statist abomination. This is two powerful forces pulling in the opposite direction – it bodes ill for our future as Americans.

In the eyes of the government usurpers the actions of free Americans are nothing less than a challenge to their ability to rule as they please. They had no idea how serious we are. How dare we take matters into our own hands? First Klamath Falls where Americans confronted authorities and even cut the locks off the fence put up by the masters. Now armed men are patrolling our borders without even deigning to ask permission of those in power.

Government is no longer in control – all the fancy computer systems and surveillance techniques in the world can’t change that. It is not an accident that these systems are pointed at us rather than the external enemies but for government; it is too little, too late. There might be hope for them if they were belatedly to take up the causes of the American people but they remain entranced by their own platitudes, and by the constant blathering of the increasingly irrelevant mainstream media.

Americans have become so enraged at ACLU and the constant attacks on our freedoms and our religion, supposedly in the name of the constitution, that it would take a very foolish man to wear an ACLU button in most neighborhoods, let alone in a workingman’s pub.

What so many on the right are missing is this simple fact: Bush and his buddies come down on the side of ACLU. Colin Powell, the government mouthpiece stated last week that Christian fundamentalists are as bad as the Islamists, clearly missing the fact that this country was founded by Christians, that he presumably works for us, and that we, the Christian people of America, did not blow up those skyscrapers!

Why would he say such a stupid thing? Why does the Bush regime actually sponsor and encourage Islamic immigration, knowing full well that they are creating a fifth column and at the very least, destroying our cultural homogeneity? How on earth can they justify welfare and business loans to immigrants, which would be a disgrace even if many Americans were not out of work?

The answer is easy. Those folks they are bringing in may occasionally kill people or blow up buildings, but on the whole they are conditioned to the lash, and have no tradition of freedom. Such people are much less of a problem for government than those nasty rednecks that Chief Moose still believes perpetrated the sniper shootings.

There is also another factor – our government is primarily secular in mindset – how many of those power mad bureaucrats in DC or New York ever bend the knee to almighty God? How can they know how important religion is to us? And to the Islamic immigrants as well… Northern Ireland anyone?

On the other side of the fence, some left-wingers actually rejoiced last week when a sexual pervert stabbed a Christian woman to death, who was attempting to share her faith with him. They blamed a right wing conspiracy for the death of the collectivist leader Paul Wellstone. Tom Daschle’s hysterical outbursts blaming Rush Limbaugh for threats against his person were very much a sign of the times. Battle lines are being drawn.

The problem with living in history is that events are more difficult to discern from up close – witness the surprise when the USSR finally lurched into oblivion. The American empire is headed likewise for the scrap heap of history and much of the world will heave a sigh of relief. What will be missed are the ideals upon which America was founded, and for which we fought two great wars of secession.

Where will it end up? Given current policies toward mass migration, it seems obvious that the South West will be flying another flag within ten years. There are in the hinterland, many who still cling to our original freedoms while the coastal cities remain hotbeds of communist sedition. Will we become the Balkans of North America? Or merely collapse into barely controlled anarchy, ruled by criminal gangs fronted by empty suits like in Russia?

Even Canada is breaking up – as freedom-loving Westerners shout their contempt for the collectivists in Ottawa who have turned their country into an international joke and jailed farmers for daring to sell their goods on the open market.

Freedom in America remains a possibility but the window is closing – there is, as theologians know, a period of grace – we are at the end of ours. We could repent and beseech the Lord to forgive us for having mocked His many blessings. We could stop slaughtering our unborn and stop waging aggressive war. Sadly, I don’t see this happening.

In my horror at the loss of our freedoms I take some satisfaction in knowing these things, but then again, I’ve lived in a country torn apart by war and that teaches some bitter lessons so I see no good coming out of this.

We’re that close folks. That close….

Mr. Peirce [send him mail] fought with the Rhodesian freedom fighters (the Ian Smith side, of course).

il ragno

2002-11-27 20:03 | User Profile

Their addiction to Marxism and its spawn, political correctness, is very dangerous and they would destroy this country in a heartbeat, all the while prattling about their great love for the "people." Unlike their communist brethren in the un-lamented USSR there is no pretense of love for the "verkers." With the democrats you can be sure that the one group for whom they have no love at all is the working class.

I genuinely like Michael Peirce an awful lot. Even if he does tend to forget that America was not founded as an explicitly Christian state and that quite a few of us have a perfect (and protected) right not to believe, I like him anyway. I'd rather have Christians surrounding me than the alternative; but 'don't tread on me' is the key American dogma regardless.

But I can't look the other way here either. Whose addiction to Marxism, Mike? Whose Bolshie brethren? Who has no love for the working class?

I get worried, but mostly weary, hearing FR-styled tough guys lay it all on the line, taboos be damned....and snarl at a safe, amorphous, could-mean-anyone-at-all scapegoat like "Democrats". And as he's specifically referring to the activist, agenda-setting, culture-eroding wing of the party, I doubt he means blacks here. Reducing the ideological opponents to "Daschle v Limbaugh" is more deliberately dumbed-down misdirection.

People shouldn't write columns like this if they begin them knowing they're going to duck their own inescapable conclusions. That's a tough thing to write, given my fondness for Peirce; but a guy who knows better but mimics a Neocon anyway, out of caution & convenience, is more a part of the problem than he thinks.

PaleoconAvatar

2002-11-27 21:02 | User Profile

I get worried, but mostly weary, hearing FR-styled tough guys lay it all on the line, taboos be damned....and snarl at a safe, amorphous, could-mean-anyone-at-all scapegoat like "Democrats". And as he's specifically referring to the activist, agenda-setting, culture-eroding wing of the party, I doubt he means blacks here. Reducing the ideological opponents to "Daschle v Limbaugh" is more deliberately dumbed-down misdirection.

Me too, IR. I see this a lot in some quarters, people who devote themselves to fighting those "evil Democrats," because once the Daschles of the world are defeated, they think, the milk and honey will start flowing again in America.

Some people really think that's the case--they think it's outlandish that anyone else could see that there's a bigger picture involved besides the old "two party" dichotomy. Others know the "two party" deal is a sham, and they respond to it by playing the game themselves to draw a paycheck, or they are more well-meaning and hope that if they really go hard on the "evil Democrats," maybe it might cause the pendulum to shift a little more toward something truly meaningful and substantial. Sadly, these people are just enabling the System--it never works that way. Half-efforts yield half-results, and the stakes--civilizational survival--are just too high to play these beachball games, as Linder calls them.

il ragno

2002-11-27 21:26 | User Profile

Some people really think that's the case--they think it's outlandish that anyone else could see that there's a bigger picture involved besides the old "two party" dichotomy. Others know the "two party" deal is a sham, and they respond to it by playing the game themselves to draw a paycheck, or they are more well-meaning and hope that if they really go hard on the "evil Democrats," maybe it might cause the pendulum to shift a little more toward something truly meaningful and substantial.

When the evidence of your own eyes and ears....and a half century of history going one way, relentlessly....tell you that government is a predatory parasite that will only defend your right to provide it with sustenance, the idea of any rational person swearing lockstep allegiance to any of the two ruling parties is laughable. The two political parties, and party politics in general, are only important insofar as it will require a broad coalition of third-and-lesser parties to cut the marionette strings tethering the DemReps to Tel Aviv. Cut those strings, and...well, what do lifeless dummies do when the performance is over, but crumple into a pointless heap?

Given that the two-party tag team is what rules our days and nights (and will for the foreseeable future), the only intelligent prescription for the American people to actually get some measurable value out of its government is to renounce party memberships altogether and reward/punish like ordering food from a Chinese menu.....this Democrat is a strong vocal critic of Israel...reward. That Republican is a fierce drum-banger for sealing the Southwestern border...reward. Now that Dem holding the Scotch rocks over there, he couldn't bomb Yugoslavia fast enough....and that GOPper with the blue tie chatting up that blonde - he talks a good game, but signs on for every program put in front of him...punish. I don't entirely discount the idea that there are some good people in government - including those who hold beliefs opposite to mine....but there can be no meritocracy in party politics. Thus there can be no meritocracy restored to American life so long as We The Cattle keep mooing one of the same two old songs. We have to pick and choose the least onerous fragments of each if we are to survive both.

"Republican" & "Democrat" were never more than....at best....necessary evils; and that was when there were such things as sovereign states. As the republic was paved over and rebuilt as The Mall Of America so have our two major parties become two pulls on the same one-armed bandit: both will get you the same three lemons. Why in God's name don't people figure that out? By the percentages of eligible voters partaking in Our Glorious Two Party System lately, they may be starting to.

MadScienceType

2002-11-27 22:21 | User Profile

Re: Peirce

My thoughts exactly (I guess I should get my own, but y'all keep beating me to the post).

I too don't always go for the "bend thy knee before God" stuff, but I also like Mr. Peirce a lot.

I know that he doesn't draw or spell out the obvious conclusions regarding just who is wedded to Marxism, but I see two other possibilities besides cowardice and keeping the 'ol paycheck coming. Granted, they probably aren't as likely, but here goes.

Given Mr. Peirce's strong faith, it may be anathema to him to criticize the chosen. Seems like he would oppose evil no matter the form or convention, but I recall in an earlier column his mention of possibly being killed through remaining unarmed when and where the Gov't. required it since it's in the Bible ("render unto Caesar" and all that). If he is following the Word closely enough to die for "Caesar", why should this subject be any different?

Second, we know that the vast majority of the public has a built-in "circuit breaker" that seems to short circuit rational thought whenever the word "Jew" and anything negative appear in proximity. Perhaps by laying out the evil for all to see, but not explicitly making the connection, he's trying to circumvent the short and maybe get folks to answer for themselves these questions?

"Whose addiction to Marxism, Mike? Whose Bolshie brethren? Who has no love for the working class?"

It would be nice if the brutal honesty of Carol of Carolontheweb and the Birdman were in mainstream publications, but I started my journey from moderate Repub. to Paleocon/Nationalist by reading Peirce and the like and connecting the dots myself. Note that this does not mean I think we need to be touchie-feelie nice and moderate our message (PJB for example, watered himself down waaaaaay too much and cratered), but realize that waking someone up from media-induced stasis is a slow process. Start 'em off with some mellow decaf and after a while you'll have them eating grounds right out of the can!

Walter Yannis

2002-11-28 07:57 | User Profile

Originally posted by MadScienceType@Nov 27 2002, 22:21 **Re: Peirce

My thoughts exactly (I guess I should get my own, but y'all keep beating me to the post).

I too don't always go for the "bend thy knee before God" stuff, but I also like Mr. Peirce a lot.

I know that he doesn't draw or spell out the obvious conclusions regarding just who is wedded to Marxism, but I see two other possibilities besides cowardice and keeping the 'ol paycheck coming. Granted, they probably aren't as likely, but here goes.

Given Mr. Peirce's strong faith, it may be anathema to him to criticize the chosen. Seems like he would oppose evil no matter the form or convention, but I recall in an earlier column his mention of possibly being killed through remaining unarmed when and where the Gov't. required it since it's in the Bible ("render unto Caesar" and all that). If he is following the Word closely enough to die for "Caesar", why should this subject be any different?

Second, we know that the vast majority of the public has a built-in "circuit breaker" that seems to short circuit rational thought whenever the word "Jew" and anything negative appear in proximity. Perhaps by laying out the evil for all to see, but not explicitly making the connection, he's trying to circumvent the short and maybe get folks to answer for themselves these questions?

"Whose addiction to Marxism, Mike? Whose Bolshie brethren? Who has no love for the working class?"

It would be nice if the brutal honesty of Carol of Carolontheweb and the Birdman were in mainstream publications, but I started my journey from moderate Repub. to Paleocon/Nationalist by reading Peirce and the like and connecting the dots myself. Note that this does not mean I think we need to be touchie-feelie nice and moderate our message (PJB for example, watered himself down waaaaaay too much and cratered), but realize that waking someone up from media-induced stasis is a slow process. Start 'em off with some mellow decaf and after a while you'll have them eating grounds right out of the can!**

                My position exactly.

The Jews did the same thing with Marxism. There was a thoroughly Jewish Marxist core group, and surrounding that were various front organziations offering Marxist ideas in various admixtures and dilutions.

A good Communist stated that in the 1930's, Party cadres were FORBIDDEN from identifying themselves publicly as a Commie. You were to say things like "I'm just concerned by some things that I see going on in the world today" or "I just want to make sure that workers are looked after" or "I just want to make sure modern ideas are presented to high school students" etc. In the conditions of a Christian America in the 1930's, any more than that would have lead to public exposure and to the small movement being utterly extirpated. The COMINTERN had layer upon layer of front organizations covering the intentions of the true leaders of the movement. Lenin said it best when he wrote that the English Communists must support the British Labour Party "like a rope supports a hanged man."

We must adopt this same strategy. We must have a thoroughly Aryan core group that maintains its unwavering dedication to white nationalist priciples, but these same ideas must be marketed under various rubrics that the sheeple will find more palatable. We must not hesitate to package our ideas to the various market segments: one package for the Freepers, another for the Mormons, another for Catholics, another for displaced white auto workers, another for Texas ranchers overrun with illegal immigrants. The core message will be diluted and decorated to fit the market.

We must understand that we're a small and despised minority. In terms of the prevailing ideology, white nationalism is a truly subversive movement, and we'd better understand that and start acting on it.

The irony of it is that our enemies have shown us how to do it. We need merely study and emulate Jewish tactics.

Walter

N.B. Forrest

2002-11-28 09:02 | User Profile

Originally posted by Walter Yannis@Nov 28 2002, 07:57 **

We must adopt this same strategy. We must have a thoroughly Aryan core group that maintains its unwavering dedication to white nationalist priciples, but these same ideas must be marketed under various rubrics that the sheeple will find more palatable. We must not hesitate to package our ideas to the various market segments: one package for the Freepers, another for the Mormons, another for Catholics, another for displaced white auto workers, another for Texas ranchers overrun with illegal immigrants. The core message will be diluted and decorated to fit the market.

**

                Sage advice, Walter. It's just a matter of making adjustments in tone (but never of fundemental principles) depending on the audience.

Avalanche

2002-12-21 04:35 | User Profile

MadScience Type: It would be nice if the brutal honesty of Carol of Carolontheweb and the Birdman were in mainstream publications, but I started my journey from moderate Repub. to Paleocon/Nationalist by reading Peirce and the like and connecting the dots myself. Note that this does not mean I think we need to be touchie-feelie nice and moderate our message (PJB for example, watered himself down waaaaaay too much and cratered), but realize that waking someone up from media-induced stasis is a slow process. Start 'em off with some mellow decaf and after a while you'll have them eating grounds right out of the  can!

Perfect! This is exactly how I think -- you must ease them into it. Michael keeps saying that giving people PART of the story, easing them into it, getting them to recognize bits and pieces, which lets them sneak up on the truth, isn't sufficient. That because it's systemic, you have to give them ALL the parts of the system, but I think then you only overwhelm them! (I haven't actually started eating the GROUNDS, but I DO like chocolate covered coffe beans!)

PENN

2002-12-21 08:44 | User Profile

This guy is a designer dogmatist. Steering Cons clear of Realpolitik and encapsulating them with Bejeezus Nonsense: A Second-Coming, "invisible hand," sound and fury, blowhard deconstructivist.

Just because he mouths Con non-issues like a good two-party partisan, he must be on Our side?

People who believe that their government is "doomed to failure" are already slaves.

Frederick William I

2002-12-21 12:08 | User Profile

Originally posted by N.B. Forrest@Nov 28 2002, 09:02 > Originally posted by Walter Yannis@Nov 28 2002, 07:57 **

We must adopt this same strategy.  We must have a thoroughly Aryan core group that maintains its unwavering dedication to white nationalist priciples, but these same ideas must be marketed under various rubrics that the sheeple will find more palatable.  We must not hesitate to package our ideas to the various market segments:  one package for the Freepers, another for the Mormons, another for Catholics, another for displaced white auto workers, another for Texas ranchers overrun with illegal immigrants.  The core message will be diluted and decorated to fit the market.  

**

Sage advice, Walter. It's just a matter of making adjustments in tone (but never of fundemental principles) depending on the audience.**

There Is a Storm Brewing

As that old Bob Zimmerman aka Dylan song went

"We don't need a Weatherman to know which way the winds blowing

(That is by the way where the SDS Weatherman faction got its name).

As to strategy, you're perfectly right. Little by little. However, you have to vary your strategy. Lenin talked about two levels of political acctivity, propoganda, and just agitation.

Agitation was not about ideology at all, it just to prepare for it and build popular support. Marxist agitation for instance might just involve saying to a factory worker "you know your factory superintendent is a dirty no good scum, and we think you deserve a lot more from scum like him. No ideology particularly, just trying to prove your usefulness. Paleo's along this line need more groups to agitate in, i.e. that directly benefit from our programme in a closely concrete way. The Arizona ranchers are one good example that we've found right now. But we really need a lot more.

As to propaganda, this is different. You have to find people that really understand your whole ideology and worldview, if you expect them to make good allies.

Since Walter mentioned the Communists and their retincence, it might be good to bring this up, that this was also a downside to this crypto tactic. Communists controlled huge organizations in the 30's and 40's (like a large part of the CIO unions) but they didn't translate that into large numbers of cad carrying members. They were so reticent (so as not to jeopardize their rank and position) as to jeopardize their propoganda and recruitment activities. So this is a downside to front tactics. To build a mass movement you need in a timely fashion to be open with at least a substantial fraction of the people you are working with personally.

We should now know that personally, from our time on the internet. It is good that we have it, but it can also be just a fig leaf we hide behind, and at worst even a substitute for more productive activity (writing letters, going to local party meetings, etc)

DRSLICEIT

2002-12-21 14:28 | User Profile

Let us examine the posibility if doing something really different and that is to ban all federal politics.

If we were to have a referendum that would require a law making it illegal to have federal politicans running for political office, we could do away with the biggest problems that we have. Just think, no more bought and paid for federal elected bozos who have an agenda to make our lives miserable. We could still have all the state powers and have state rights that would make the rules that the citizens wanted and be held accountable to the citizens.

The 50 govenors could elect one of them to be the designated chairman who would represent America and all agreements, laws and other particulars of government would be subject to a 2/3 majority vote by the Govenors.

We could do away with most of the alphabet agencies, the executive branch and legislative lemmings. No more self interesting lobyist or corporate greed would hold our country in a death grip and we could begin to regain some control over our future.

Since is seems certain that we are headed towards a totalitarian government controlled by a plutocracy, this idea would at least keep us from becoming 21st century techno-slaves. ÖƒÖ

Walter Yannis

2002-12-23 09:05 | User Profile

Originally posted by DRSLICEIT@Dec 21 2002, 14:28 ** Let us examine the posibility if doing something really different and that is to ban all federal politics.

If we were to have a referendum that would require a law making it illegal to have federal politicans running for political office, we could do away with the biggest problems that we have. Just think, no more bought and paid for federal elected bozos who have an agenda to make our lives miserable. We could still have all the state powers and have state rights that would make the rules that the citizens wanted and be held accountable to the citizens.

The 50 govenors could elect one of them to be the designated chairman who would represent America and all agreements, laws and other particulars of government would be subject to a 2/3 majority vote by the Govenors.

We could do away with most of the alphabet agencies, the executive branch and legislative lemmings. No more self interesting lobyist or corporate greed would hold our country in a death grip and we could begin to regain some control over our future.

Since is seems certain that we are headed towards a totalitarian government controlled by a plutocracy, this idea would at least keep us from becoming 21st century techno-slaves. ÖƒÖ **

We should repeal the 14th amendment. The "equal protection clause" of the 14th is the thing that allowed the Federal judiciary to "federalize" all state law touching in any way on the Bill of Rights. It's the thing that allowed them to construct a non-existent "right of privacy" and then to strike down 47 (if memory serves) state laws outlawing most abortions.

Of course, that would require Civil War II. The good news is that it's just around the corner . . .

Walter

DRSLICEIT

2002-12-23 13:41 | User Profile

Walter, many thanks for your response. Yes I agree that the second revolution must surely be close at hand if we are to prevent being enslaved for the rest of our lives.

It is way over due for a message to be sent that we insist on a government for the people and by the people and no other facsimile will be accepted.

Avalanche

2002-12-26 21:51 | User Profile

MadScienceType:  Given Mr. Peirce's strong faith, it may be anathema to him to criticize the chosen. Seems like he would oppose evil no matter the form or convention, but I recall in an earlier column his mention of possibly being killed through remaining unarmed when and where the Gov't. required it since it's in the Bible ("render unto Caesar" and all that). If he is following the Word closely enough to die for "Caesar", why should this subject be any different?

I had a long talk with an employee -- a fundamentalist/Calvinist -- because his oldest son is reaching his high teens, and I am exploring (and trying to get HIM to explore) just who is running ‘our’ govt... He sees that the Jews have fallen away from God, that’s why they were punished (by losing israel, I think he means?)
And I got him to acknowledge that if this govt is ZOG, and the war that follows Iraq (cause, I HOPE, Iraq will be over before his son is draft age) is coming, it’s a problem in how does he decide what to advise his son?
He feels that his son SHOULD fight for America IF it’s a just war.
But, says I, how can it be a JUST war, if it’s waged by and for the Jews and NOT for America? (And the jews are satanic (his words!) because they have fallen away from god? So, how can fighting on their behalf possibly be a 'just' war?!) Hmmm, well, that puts an interesting cast to it...

I think, in talking to Christians about rendering to Caesar, we need to get them to think about just who Caesar IS and should be... Is it ‘whoever’ is running the govt, even if THEY are evil, apostate-from-god jews? Is any-old-govt acceptable as Caesar? Or does Caesar have to be a legitimate govt (as in, representing the people OF the country, and not foreigners/parasites) and be dedicated to the protection of the people of the country?

Walter Yannis:  We must adopt this same strategy. We must have a thoroughly Aryan core group that maintains its unwavering dedication to white nationalist priciples, but these same ideas must be marketed under various rubrics that the sheeple will find more palatable. We must not hesitate to package our ideas to the various market segments: one package for the Freepers, another for the Mormons, another for Catholics, another for displaced white auto workers, another for Texas ranchers overrun with illegal immigrants. The core message will be diluted and decorated to fit the market. The irony of it is that our enemies have shown us how to do it. We need merely study and emulate Jewish tactics.

No, Walter, It’s not a Jewish tactic, it’s a GOOD teaching technique (from back when teachers were TEACHING, not indoctrinating...) You must start where the student IS. By couching our teachings in language and examples that our hearer identifies with (because all humans are first concerned about themselves and their own), you’ll have a better chance to get them to consider the problems we’re trying to alarm them to.

Primal

2002-12-26 23:40 | User Profile

...but upon the Iraqis, whose sin was so much worse than that – they annoyed Senor Bush’s daddy…

I think this is a false cover reason for Bush Jr's desire to take on Saddam. It's the ready reason, but doesn't hold water--anymore than saying the Arabs don't like us because we are free. Who is buying this garbage?